A separation of the races is the only perfect
preventive of amalgamation.

Abraham Lincoln, June 26, 1857

In 1988 I had the opportunity to meet William Gayley Simpson,
author of Which Way Western Man . At that time he was in
his nineties and in declining health. He compensated for his lack
of conversational endurance by distilling the essence of his thought
into one very terse and pointed message: "Separate or die."
Those were his last words to me, and that is fitting, for that
simple phrase tells us two vitally important things. First, that
racial separation is necessary for the long-term preservation
of the Northern European race, the founding and still the majority
American racial type, which I refer to as the Nordish race. It
is a simple matter of either-or -- either racial separation or
racial death. Second, that the alternative to racial destruction,
the solution to the Nordish racial crisis, is racial separation.
Not immigration restrictions, segregation, white supremacism or
other half-measures, nor anything that need harm other races or
violate their legitimate rights and interests. [Note
1] None of these things can save
us. Only separation can. Separation is the preservationist imperative.

The reason separation is necessary for racial preservation
is simple -- the evolution and continued existence of different
races is made possible by reproductive isolation. When different
populations are reproductively isolated they cannot interbreed
or intermix, and consequently evolve in different directions,
developing into different races with their own unique and distinct
ensemble of genetic traits. Reproductive isolation requires an
absence of physical contact. As a practical matter, this requires
geographic separation.

There is already a law of biology (Gause's law of exclusion)
which states that multiple animal species with the same requirements
cannot coexist in the long term in the same habitat. One will
eventually replace the others, which will become extinct. This
law can also be applied to human races occupying the same territory:
one race will eventually assimilate or replace its competitors.
Since it is a fact that every human population living today has
interbred with every other human population with which it has
had extensive contact, there should also be a law of sociology
which states that different races sharing the same habitat (i.e.,
lacking the race-creating and preserving condition of reproductive
isolation) will eventually intermix and blend into one race, destroying
their racially unique traits. The more extensive the contact and
interaction between the races the more rapid the process of interbreeding
will tend to be, but whatever the rate, slow or fast, it will
occur, with the most racially destructive consequences for the
race with the more recessive genetic traits.

For the Nordish race, with its many recessive genetic traits,
the consequences of extensive intermixture are racial destruction,
and as intermixture is unavoidable in a multiracial environment,
the inevitable consequence of multiracial conditions is the destruction
or extinction of the Nordish race. Since the Nordish race requires
racial separation for its continued existence or preservation,
to oppose racial separation is to effectively oppose the preservation
or continued existence of the Nordish race, to effectively propose
and support Nordish racial destruction or extinction, and this
is the position of the presently dominant or "mainstream"
elements.

Since intermixture is an unavoidable consequence of multiracial
conditions, those conditions themselves are the proximate cause
of intermixture, and the blame for racial intermixture and its
destructive consequences belongs to all those who promote, support
or defend multiracial conditions and oppose the separation-isolation
which is the only effective means to prevent intermixture and
secure racial preservation. This is true even for persons who
ostensibly oppose racial intermixture, for if they support multiracial
conditions of existence -- or oppose separation, which amounts
to the same thing -- they are in fact supporting the cause of
intermixture. They might say they favor the reimposition of a
segregationist, white supremacist or "traditional" society,
where intermixture is prohibited by law and custom, but a multiracial
society is not a "traditional" society. The "traditional"
society of the Nordish race, the type of society in which it was
created and preserved for many thousands of years, is a monoracial
society. Such a society provides reproductive isolation, the condition
required for both racial creation and preservation, and does not
need to prohibit intermixture by law or custom because by its
very monoracial nature it prevents intermixture far more effectively
than any law or custom ever could. Thus the only effective cure
for intermixture, the only way to prevent it from destroying the
Nordish race, is to restore it to its traditional, separate monoracial
existence.

Unfortunately, the fact that separation is required for Nordish
preservation is either not known or evaded by far too many people,
thus permitting multiracial conditions to proceed toward their
inevitable consequences without those consequences being recognized
and addressed. It often seems as if everyone in the "mainstream"
behaves and speaks as if they were racial ingénues, ignorant,
thoughtless and naive regarding racial realities and consequences.
Even those race-conscious conservatives regarded as being on the
extreme right fringe of the limits of "respectability"
on the racial issue (typically defined by opposition to affirmative
action and support for immigration restrictions), by their evasion
or denial of the requirement for racial separation for racial
preservation, offer no more than palliatives to soothe the symptoms
of this fatal disease without effecting a real cure. In fact,
many mainstream conservatives and liberals actually view intermixture
as a cure, as a means to promote national unity and prevent ethnic
differences from fracturing or tearing the country apart, and
thus as highly desirable. Such intermixture (euphemistically referred
to as assimilation) is of course the true end of multiracialism,
revealing it as a sham, a temporary or transitional social condition
which provides the means for racial destruction by the assimilation
of (i.e., intermixture with) incompatible elements. Multiracialism
is thus the prelude to Nordish extinction. The prelude might seem
long, lasting generations or even centuries, but the extinction
that follows is forever. Racial preservationist alternatives --
i.e., separation if multiracial conditions already exist, or immigration
restrictions to prevent the creation of multiracial conditions
where they do not yet exist -- are not considered, but are evaded
or denied.

The pattern of evasion or denial of the necessity for racial
separation for racial preservation, the unwillingness or inability
to face racial realities and the consequences of multiracialism,
is made possible by the fatal fantasy of the Nordish race. This
fatal fantasy is the false belief or misconception that the Nordish
race can continue to exist in a multiracial society. [Note
2] It is the escapist fantasy for
Northern Europeans who refuse to face the threats to their survival.
This misconception is fatal because it permits people to evade
and deny the consequences of multiracialism rather than face them
and take action to prevent them. When the ultimate destinations
of two different paths cannot be clearly seen, there is a natural
tendency to take the easier path and deny the need or desirability
of the more difficult course. Separation would certainly be difficult,
and so its necessity for preservation has long been evaded and
denied. But this pattern of evasion and denial is itself the first
difficulty, the first obstacle along the path to separation, that
must be overcome before separation can be achieved. Separation
will be achieved only when enough people want it to be achieved,
and this will probably happen only when it is widely recognized
as necessary for racial preservation. Therefore the first important
step on the road to racial separation and preservation is to free
the Nordish people of the fatal fantasy, so they can see, recognize,
understand and face the racially destructive consequences of multiracialism
rather than evade them.

The current process of displacement, replacement and destruction
of the Nordish race is caused by four interacting processes --
non-Nordish immigration, a high non-Nordish birthrate, a low Nordish
birthrate (actually below the replacement level for more than
20 years), and racial intermixture. In a multiracial society all
of these processes result in members of the Nordish race being
replaced by members of other races. But in a monoracial society
both intermixture and immigration by members of other races would
be effectively prevented, and the differential birthrates of two
races in different countries could not result in the replacement
of one by the other. A low Nordish birthrate would result only
in a smaller population. Also, it could be recognized as a problem,
and its causes addressed and hopefully corrected. In contrast,
the currently dominant racial nihilist ideology and value-system
of the multiracial society is so hostile to Nordish preservation
that any attempt to recognize, address or solve the problems threatening
Nordish existence would face strong resistance and condemnation,
and in any event would be ultimately futile without separation.

Racial nihilism, the ideological foundation of multiracialism,
regards the very existence of different races (or at least the
Nordish race) as something regrettable or even evil -- as if the
original sin of our ancestors was their divergence into different
races -- and thus something not worthy of preservation, or even
acknowledgment. The only traits it considers valuable and important
are those which all humans share in common, which are universal
to all, not any which are particular to a certain group, in which
they differ or are unique and distinct. It promotes the destruction
of racial diversity through racial intermixture to create one
universal race, and welcomes the growing population of racially-mixed
persons as its ideal. As Shirlee Taylor Haizlip writes in The
Sweeter the Juice, "Genes and chromosomes from Africa,
Europe, and a pristine America commingled and created me...I am
an American anomaly. I am an American ideal. I am the American
nightmare. I am the Martin Luther King dream. I am the new America."
In a multiracial society racially-mixed persons are not -- as
the fatal fantasy would have us believe -- an aberration, or --
as an Alabama school principal naively remarked -- a mistake.
They are in fact the natural, normal, unavoidable and inevitable
end product of a multiracial society. They are the personification
of the racial nihilist and multiracialist version of the American
Dream -- that America is, must be, and was meant to be a multiracial
society -- that has now been exported to the formerly monoracial
Nordish homelands of Europe.

This was not the dream of our Nordish-American ancestors. Quite
the opposite. They desired a monoracial nation, and with the exception
of the Southern states -- where the black population was concentrated
-- that is essentially what they had. Until the 1890s the non-black
population of America was overwhelmingly Nordish, and the country
and its culture had a distinctly Nordish racial identity and character,
which remained predominant until the 1960s. (One indicator of
the extension of this predominance into the 1960s is the fact
that all the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo astronauts were Nordish.)
Yet, ironically, the prevailing hostility to racial conservation,
and acceptance of the racial nihilist version of the American
dream, is shared by many who are identified as "conservatives."
Those mainstream conservatives who are not explicitly hostile
to racial conservationist concerns are generally indifferent to
them. Most are interested in conserving the political and economic
system, some in conserving the Western cultural heritage, but
it would be difficult to find a prominent conservative willing
to publicly express an interest in conserving the race that created
the heritage they profess to cherish.

As an example, consider a statement by John O'Sullivan, former
editor of National Review, widely regarded as the premier
publication of American conservatism. In an article entitled "America's
Identity Crisis" (Nov. 21, 1994, p. 76), in which he ostensibly
defends American nationality and cultural continuity by supporting
immigration restrictions, he effectively denies all concern for
racial identity and continuity, saying "[I]f...black Americans
were to become the majority in 2050 (which is, of course, demographically
unrealistic), we would view this with indifference. A changing
ethnic balance resulting from differential ethnic birthrates among
people of the same nationality...should not make white Americans
feel culturally dispossessed." But what about racially dispossessed?
He divorces race from nationality and culture, asserting that
only the latter are a legitimate matter of concern, and that other
"white" Americans should share this racial nihilist
view. Yet he still invokes the soothing fantasy that there is
no need for concern by reassuring the reader that a black majority
is demographically unrealistic, displaying the long outdated tendency
to define the racial issue in narrowly white-black terms. But
it is now universally accepted by the pundits -- they say beyond
serious dispute -- and acceptable to publicly state in the mainstream
media, that although blacks alone will not be a majority by 2050,
"non-whites" as a whole certainly will be. So Mr. O'Sullivan,
or his spiritual descendants, will have the opportunity in 2050
to view a majority non-white America with indifference, unless
separation intervenes. In fact, he would probably be indifferent
to know that the Nordish race, currently (1995) 57% of the population
as a whole, 50% of the population under the age of 15, and 47%
of births, will by 2050, at an immigration level of 880,000 per
year (i.e., the current official legal level; 40% below the current
actual legal level), and allowing for differential birthrates
and intermixture, be reduced to 32% of the population as a whole,
20% of the population under the age of 15, and 19% of births.
Even if all immigration were stopped it would still be reduced
to 41% of the population as a whole, 28% of the population under
the age of 15 and 27% of births.

Anyone who has witnessed the dramatic worsening in the Nordish
racial situation in just the last thirty years should be aware
of how rapidly the process of destruction can develop. If present
trends continue, I project that by the year 2050 the under-15
age group of the Nordish population in the U.S. will be reduced
by 25-30% (the lower figure based on zero immigration) due to
the effects of intermixture alone. By 2050 intermixture alone
will likely cause the Nordish population in the U.S. to be reduced
by 15-18 million (the lower figure again based on zero immigration).
Furthermore, the loss will not stop in 2050, but will only accelerate
with each generation. [Note 3] Are there any mainstream conservatives
who, if they were aware of this, would not be indifferent to it,
who would wish to prevent it and conserve the Nordish race?

Far too many people fail to think in long range terms about
the eventual consequences of multiracialism. Do they really think
that the multiracial society can continue indefinitely, go on
forever just as it is at this moment, never changing? Unfortunately,
few people seem to give the subject serious thought. This lack
of awareness and urgency is largely due to the fact that racial
destruction is a gradual process, occurring incrementally, not
all at once. Yet it is not something that will suddenly occur
as a singular event in the distant future, nor something that
is not imminent and can therefore be evaded or ignored. It is
a process that is occurring now and has been occurring on a significant
scale for more than a generation. Great loss and destruction has
already occurred. Many members of the Nordish race have already
been lost through intermixture, and many more are being lost every
day. Would Mr. O'Sullivan still be indifferent to the demographic
changes that will occur -- even if all immigration were stopped
-- if he understood that they were not only a matter of shifting
proportions, not even only a matter of Nordish displacement and
replacement, but a matter of Nordish racial destruction and extinction,
of the eventual nonexistence of his race, as a result of the multiracial
conditions he defends? If he were still indifferent with this
knowledge he would not be alone. A common reaction to it is a
shrug explained by the remark that "We won't live to see
it," or a desolate rhetorical "Who cares?" This
indifference and lack of caring is both a product and a cause
of the prevailing ideology of racial nihilism.

Racial nihilism is now so dominant that it is not considered
morally acceptable to advocate or support racial preservation,
to be pro-race, to love or value racial differences or view them
as important and desire their continued existence. It is barely
acceptable to support cultural preservation, and few "conservatives"
are publicly willing to conserve more than this. Cultural preservationists
are somewhat protected in their opposition to multiculturalism
by the fact that many "liberals" also oppose multiculturalism
for fear that it will obstruct and slow the process of intermixture-assimilation.
But they need not fear. Multiculturalism probably will not slow
the process of intermixture enough to really matter. The growth
of multiculturalism only means that Western culture will be replaced
along with the race that created it, to the dismay of those conservative
grave diggers who are only too happy to bury the Nordish race,
but who become grave robbers in their ghoulish desire to preserve
the culture and institutions of the West disembodied from the
race that created them. Yet for racial preservationists multiculturalism
does provide another supporting reason for separation. Cultural
preservationists should be made aware that separation for racial
preservation would also be the surest means -- perhaps the only
means -- to achieve their goal of cultural preservation. It should
be presumed that race and culture go together, that multiracialism
and multiculturalism go together, that racial and cultural replacement
and destruction go together, and that racial and cultural preservation
go together. Only willful evasion and denial, or folly, or madness,
would permit any other presumption.

Separation is the only preservationist solution effective in
the long-term, and to fail to realize this -- or worse, to deny
it -- is to fall victim to the fatal fantasy. After generations
of this fantasy, of evasion and denial of racial realities, the
racial situation has reached a crisis point where we can no longer
afford to continue this racial madness and folly. We can no longer
afford to be racial ingénues, innocent of racial knowledge,
ignorant of racial reality and the racial consequences of our
actions, deluding ourselves with the false hope that minor changes,
or a return to an earlier stage in the process of racial replacement,
will suffice to prevent the process from reaching its fateful
conclusion. Such minor measures, or attempts to restore the status
quo ante, can do no more than slow the process. Only a major
measure -- separation -- can effectively assure racial preservation.

The first goal of a separation-for-preservation movement would
be to raise the issue of racial preservation to public awareness,
to place it on the public agenda, to make it a subject of debate
and discussion in the forum of public opinion, where it must be
addressed and can no longer be evaded. Every politician, every
holder of public office or would-be holder of the public trust,
would be required to clearly state their position on the issue
of racial preservation, to go on the record as for or against,
pro or con. Eventually, it must become the overriding, dominating
issue of our time, taking precedence over all others, so that
all other issues become secondary, and differences on all other
issues are subordinated to alliances based on agreement on the
issue of racial preservation. The first supporters of racial separation-for-preservation
will be those who already love and value their race and only need
to know that separation is necessary for its preservation and
can be achieved by moral means. Later supporters -- the majority
-- will be those who require a more extensive process of education
to convince them that separation-for-preservation is both necessary
and morally right, for reasons ranging from the traditional liberal
concern for rights and independence to a conservationist ethic
in favor of preserving human racial diversity. Their support will
be critical and decisive. If and when the Nordish race wins their
support it will be saved. If it fails to win their support it
will be lost. Therefore it is of the utmost importance that a
separation-for-preservation movement be based on an ideology with
well-defined values, goals and methods that are morally acceptable
to the majority of the Nordish race.

As a practical matter geographic separation will always be
required for reproductive isolation. In the past geographic distance
and barriers in themselves were usually sufficient providers of
geographic separation and reproductive isolation. But due to the
transportation advances of the modern age, we can no longer rely
on geographic distance and barriers alone to provide reproductive
isolation. We must provide it for ourselves by creating monoracial
nations with well-guarded borders that effectively prevent entry
by members of other races. (A multiracial society is unable to
protect itself from immigration by foreign races because it has
no racial identity, and therefore no racial identity to protect.)
Given the projected rapid rate of demographic change in the U.S.,
with the rapid decline in the Nordish portion of the population,
the sooner a partition is achieved the more favorable the terms
will be for the Nordish-American people. In another essay, Racial Partition for Racial Preservation,
I propose a partition settlement that would be appropriate for
the present generation. [Note 4]

The original meaning of the Indo-European word "paradise"
in the Avestan (Old Iranian) language was "walled-around"
(pairi, around + daeza, wall), and referred to a
walled-in park or garden. (From this the Greeks referred to a
garden or park as a paradeisos .) The wall was necessary
to protect the life-forms in the garden by separating them from
the life-forms outside. Without that walled separation the life-forms
outside the garden would not be kept outside and the life in the
garden would be overwhelmed and replaced. If the Nordish race
is to have its paradise, a place where it can survive and its
life be preserved, it must also have a "wall" that effectively
separates it from other races and provides it with the protected
monoracial habitat and reproductive isolation it needs for its
preservation. Without a wall of secure borders separating the
Nordish race from other races there will be no protected habitat,
no reproductive isolation, no paradise for the Nordish race where
its existence can be safely preserved, but only the wasteland
of the multiracial society where it cannot live, only die, where
its existence cannot be continued, only destroyed.

The monoracial existence of our past was a racial paradise.
We lost that paradise first with the creation of new multiracial
societies, then with the transformation of our old monoracial
societies into multiracial societies, exchanging our monoracial
paradise for a multiracial wasteland where our race cannot survive.
We must regain that lost paradise if our race is to be preserved.

Separation is the preservationist imperative. It is necessary
for Nordish racial survival. This is the bottom line, the point
where no retreat, appeasement or surrender is possible without
surrendering the very existence of the Nordish race by perpetuating
the multiracial conditions that are destroying it. Thus separation
must be the clear goal of all our efforts. Anything less is simply
not worth the effort. I realize that this goal will be difficult
to achieve, but the truly amazing thing is that so far we have
not really even begun to try. To date, no serious effort of any
significance has been made by Nordish-Americans to promote and
achieve the goal of racial preservation by political-geographic
separation. To achieve this goal we will need to gain the support
of the majority of Nordish-Americans, with the other Nordish nations
hopefully then following our lead on the path of racial preservation
as they are now following us on the path of racial destruction.
This admittedly seems to be a daunting task, but it is one that
must be undertaken. The future existence of the Nordish race depends
upon it.

Notes

1. Legitimate racial rights and interests are primary
or vital (life-essential) rights and interests and those secondary
or non-vital rights and interests which do not violate or conflict
with the primary or vital rights and interests of other races.

2. Works of science fiction set several centuries in
the future which feature a still-thriving Nordish population in
a multiracial society (such as the various Star Trek series)
are among the most obvious and misleading examples of this fatal
fantasy. Imperial Earth , by Arthur C. Clarke, which portrays
a future where the Nordish race no longer exists due to racial
intermixture, is one of the very rare truthful exceptions to this
rule, although Clarke only mentions this fact as an aside midway
through the story, and treats it as a matter of no concern or
importance.

3. Allowing for intermixture, my projections in generation
intervals of 30 years for the under-15 age group of the Nordish
population in the U.S., which in 1992 was 27.7 million, are as
follows: 2020 = 22.4 million; 2050 = 15 million; 2080 = 9 million;
2110 = 5 million; 2140 = 2.7 million (i.e., a 90% reduction in
150 years). This projection is based on the assumption that fully
50% of each Nordish generation would strictly discriminate on
racial grounds in their selection of a mate and refuse to mate
with a member of another race or a racially-mixed person who is
only partly of their own race. The other 50% would not racially
discriminate in their choice of a mate, with the consequence that
the racial proportions among their mates would reflect the racial
proportions of the population (specifically, the pool of prospective
mates) as a whole. (Thus the 15 million Nordish-Americans of the
under-15 generation of 2050 would comprise only about 20% of their
generation of Americans as a whole, so that 50%, or 7.5 million,
who racially discriminated in their choice of a mate, and 20%
of the remainder, or 1.5 million, who did not racially discriminate
but by chance chose a mate of their own race, totaling 9 million,
would produce the 9 million Nordish-Americans of the generation
of 2080.) Since each Nordish generation would constitute an ever
smaller proportion of the total population, it would be increasingly
difficult for 50% to racially discriminate successfully in their
choice of mates. Even among the current generation of Nordish
youth, who have been heavily indoctrinated with the racial nihilist
belief that any kind of racial discrimination is morally evil,
it is unlikely that 50% would practice strict racial discrimination
in the choice of a mate.

4. If partition is not achieved in the current generation,
it is likely that the Nordish racial grouping would have to settle
for much less favorable terms of partition in the future, with
a much smaller proportion of territory, as by 2020 (allowing for
intermixture) they would be only 53% of the population, and by
2050 only 38%. Of course, by that point their situation would
be so desperate that they would be fortunate -- and probably unlikely
-- to obtain any terms of partition.